Video: Barney Frank calls Justice Scalia a homophobe

posted at 5:55 pm on March 23, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The Hill had this moment in its Briefing Room over the weekend, but I didn’t hear about it until HA reader Danno sent us an e-mail. Maybe Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) doesn’t give a damn if people hear him call Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia a bigot, or maybe he thought no one outside of 365gay.com’s target audience would notice. The remark happens almost immediately:

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) called Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia a “homophobe” Friday for opposing gay rights.

“I do think that this argument that it’s unconstitutional for the federal government to pick and choose which marriages it will recognize is a good one,” Frank said Friday in an interview with a gay news website, 365gay.com.

“At some point it’s going to have to go to the United States Supreme Court,” he continued. “I wouldn’t want it to go to the United States Supreme Court now because that homophobe Antonin Scalia has too many votes on this court.”

The Supreme Court has no basis for intervening in what is a policy dispute.  The Constitution does not have any language that requires the federal government to recognize gay marriage, or to force states to do the same.   Regardless of Scalia’s personal biases or lack thereof, the matter belongs to the states and to the legislative branch.  If Barney Frank wants to overturn DOMA, let him introduce a bill to do so, and it will have the same shot that DOMA did of passage.

Pointing this out does not make someone a homophobe.  Would such a bill pass?  Probably not, because a large number of Frank’s Democratic colleagues would oppose the bill on two grounds: jurisdiction and tradition.  Frank wants to let his colleagues off the hook — notice that he doesn’t refer to them as “homophobes”, even though they have a lot more to do with the current policy than Scalia — by pressuring the Supreme Court to act as a legislative body on policy rather than rule on the Constitutional application of law.

It’s a cheap shot, and one I’d like to say was beneath the dignity of a member of Congress, except we’re talking about Barney Frank here.

Update: Tommy Christopher has some background in response to the Fox News version of the story::

He went on to conclude that “the Texas statute undeniably seeks to further the belief of its citizens that certain forms of sexual behavior are immoral and unacceptable, the same interest furthered by criminal laws against fornication, bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality and obscenity.”

While sodomy does include many activities favored by heterosexuals, I think we all know what they’re talking about. Frank seems to be on steady ground here.

Well, no, he’s not.  In his dissent on that decision, Scalia (like Clarence Thomas) allowed that the law might or might not be stupid, but it wasn’t unconstitutional.  The Court in Bowers refused to find a fundamental constitutional right to homosexual sodomy, and also refused to do so in Lawrence, but overturned the law anyway largely on the basis of their distaste for the Texas law.  Scalia wrote:

Texas Penal Code Ann. §21.06(a) (2003) undoubtedly imposes constraints on liberty. So do laws prohibiting prostitution, recreational use of heroin, and, for that matter, working more than 60 hours per week in a bakery. But there is no right to “liberty” under the Due Process Clause, though today’s opinion repeatedly makes that claim. Ante, at 6 (“The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to make this choice”); ante, at 13 (“ ‘ These matters … are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment’ ”); ante, at 17 (“Their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government”). The Fourteenth Amendment expressly allows States to deprive their citizens of “liberty,” so long as “due process of law” is provided:

And later he explains that the court overreached in Lawrence:

Let me be clear that I have nothing against homosexuals, or any other group, promoting their agenda through normal democratic means. Social perceptions of sexual and other morality change over time, and every group has the right to persuade its fellow citizens that its view of such matters is the best. That homosexuals have achieved some success in that enterprise is attested to by the fact that Texas is one of the few remaining States that criminalize private, consensual homosexual acts. But persuading one’s fellow citizens is one thing, and imposing one’s views in absence of democratic majority will is something else. I would no more require a State to criminalize homosexual acts–or, for that matter, display any moral disapprobation of them–than I would forbid it to do so. What Texas has chosen to do is well within the range of traditional democratic action, and its hand should not be stayed through the invention of a brand-new “constitutional right” by a Court that is impatient of democratic change. It is indeed true that “later generations can see that laws once thought necessary and proper in fact serve only to oppress,” ante, at 18; and when that happens, later generations can repeal those laws. But it is the premise of our system that those judgments are to be made by the people, and not imposed by a governing caste that knows best.

That’s the basis of democratic self-governance, rather than clerical rule, regardless of whether the clerics adhere to a religious faith or an autocratic class of ideologues.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Hmmm….let’s see here.
Criticize a Black Democrap and you’re a racist.
Criticize a Female Democrap and you’re mysoginist.
Criticize a Gay Democrap and you’re a homophobe.
Anyone see a connection here? No? Alright then. Move along.

greasywrench on March 23, 2009 at 6:56 PM

Great… more hate crimes. Just what this country needs.

Hog Wild on March 23, 2009 at 6:57 PM

We don’t need “more gay Republicans”n thuja. We need more conservatives. Le*ve identity politics to the libs.

OhioCoastie on March 23, 2009 at 6:57 PM

I would not think twice of biatch slapping him, but then again if I did I would be brought up on charges of a “hate crime!” When in actuality my biatch slapping him would have absolutely nothing to do with the fact he’s a D**K smoker but instead has everything to do with th fact he’s a hypocritical, lying POS that is in government for himself not the PEOPLE!

Liberty or Death on March 23, 2009 at 6:39 PM

1. Slapping a homosexual is not a hate crime. Slapping someone BECAUSE they are a homosexual in an effort to intimidate other homosexuals might be, but it would depend on the context of the slap.

2. The fact that you call him a “D**K smoker” sort of suggests that you might have a problem with homosexuals.

3. How is Barney Frank calling Justice Scalia a homophobe hypocritical? Is Barney Frank a homophobe?

I mean, I love Justice Scalia (not in a gay way), but the homophobe charge, while I 100% disagree with it, does have a basis. I think it’s wrong, but you can make a rational argument for it.

4. He represents the people- The people of his very liberal district in Massachusetts. The fact that he keeps getting re-elected suggests that they like him, and that he does represent them. I wish they would stop re-electing him, but I think he represents their ultraliberal views quite well.

Proud Rino on March 23, 2009 at 6:57 PM

The founding fathers would not believe their eyes or ears. How does a pervert get and stay in office.Sad sooo very sad.

nineveh on March 23, 2009 at 6:58 PM

I’ll say it again….as(s) by now Barney probably qualifies as a common law woman, she should go to a woman’s prison.

Patrick S on March 23, 2009 at 7:01 PM

Before people here post about Barney Frank, I’d suggest that they remember that they’ll probably never meet the man in person. Our problem with Barney Frank is not his lack of obvious teeth. Our problem is his bad ideas. Perhaps, we should focus the discussion on those ideas.

thuja on March 23, 2009 at 7:02 PM

Jail???? You’ve got to be kidding. That would be like dying and going to heaven for this, I think the gays call them “Old Toads”…………Not to mention at his age, you know damn well he’s the “Catcher” and not the “Pitcher”….That toothless grin would be handy for him too. Damn it, I must be a homophobe. I just lost my apetite thinking of that homo having a gay old time…….

adamsmith on March 23, 2009 at 7:02 PM

Proud Rhino made some interesting points about Mass voters and the fact they keep re-electing Bawhney Fwank. The great Jeff Jacoby wrote an interesting article last week about just such a thing. Care to read it? Click the link below.

http://www.jeffjacoby.com/4813/cradle-of-democracy

greasywrench on March 23, 2009 at 7:03 PM

Does Barney have any teeth? Every time I see him speak, I’m struck that he seems toothless? Am I missing something, or is he?

TinMan13 on March 23, 2009 at 7:03 PM

Patrick S on March 23, 2009 at 7:01 PM

This is really classy. I wonder why homosexuals aren’t so keen on the GOP when class acts like Patrick S here say things like that?

Proud Rino on March 23, 2009 at 7:03 PM

Barney’s policy preferences go hand-in-glove with his sexual preferences. The latter informs the former. As such, his sexual behavior is fair political game.

OhioCoastie on March 23, 2009 at 7:06 PM

I’m a Frankophobe, and I’m not afraid to say it.

Buy Danish on March 23, 2009 at 7:06 PM

greasywrench on March 23, 2009 at 7:03 PM

That article was pointless. “Oh, it’s hard to run against an incumbent?” NO. NO WAY. And what was he arguing for? McCain-Feingold for the states? I thought conservatives (correctly) hated McCain-Feingold? I guess you only hate it when it doesn’t serve your interests, huh. That must be nice, to have principles like that that change whenever it’s expedient.

“Oh, the New England state with lots of cities and minorities and where the Kennedys are from is super-Democratic?” NO SERIOUSLY GET OUT.

Proud Rino on March 23, 2009 at 7:08 PM

We don’t need “more gay Republicans”n thuja. We need more conservatives. Le*ve identity politics to the libs.

OhioCoastie on March 23, 2009 at 6:57 PM

I agree wholeheartedly with you–enough with these silly identity cards! I’ll just admit I was baiting some of the homophobic posters whose posts I had just read. (“Homophobic” means anti-gay for all practical purposes in our society. Let’s get over its irrelevant etymology. It’s not that interesting to argue it for the 199th time.)

thuja on March 23, 2009 at 7:09 PM

I never did understand the term homophobia. It literally means scared of Gays. Who the heck is scared of sissies?

Guardian on March 23, 2009 at 7:14 PM

Oh c’mon! I don’t care what someone does in their bedroom, but I do mind when they wear it on their sleeves. And just because they may want to behave in a certain way, I am not going to be forced to respect it!

What do you call someone who constantly tries to fit a round peg into another round peg? Mentally balanced? I think not. I believe it is cruel to pretend that homosexuality is just another acceptable lifestyle. It is, and until recently, has been treated as a manifestation of emotional problems. Ignoring this, and denying psychological treatment for these people, is cruel.

IMHO

stonemeister on March 23, 2009 at 7:14 PM

That interview was gay.

Bishop on March 23, 2009 at 5:59 PM

+1

bluelightbrigade on March 23, 2009 at 7:18 PM

Barney Frank is a disgusting human being.

SCOOPTHIScarlos on March 23, 2009 at 7:22 PM

Rino, I guess Jacoby wasn’t speaking to you or you didn’t see or understand the irony he pointed out. Oh well. And don’t bother extropolating about me. You have no fu**ing idea what I support or don’t support.

greasywrench on March 23, 2009 at 7:25 PM

Regardless of what Barney Frank chooses to insert where, he remains a vile, shapeless sack of syphilitic pus.

Which I can only assume is also descriptive of the constituents he represents.

Harpazo on March 23, 2009 at 7:28 PM

greasywrench on March 23, 2009 at 7:25 PM

Well you posted his article praising MN’s public financing and spending caps and lamenting how Massachusetts didn’t have that, so incumbents could stay in office easier (which is true in every state and is particularly true in states where there are not spending caps for elections).

I assumed you supported the premise in the article that you linked to. Do you normally link to things you disagree with? Should I pretend it’s opposite day when you post?

Proud Rino on March 23, 2009 at 7:30 PM

I’ll take Justice Scalia any day over a foaming-at-the-mouth Democrat who has his arms elbow-deep in this economic meltdown.

This is the same jerk who had a prostitution ring running out of his house and he claimed he didn’t know.

And yet, this jerk gets re-elected…what a world.

Richard Romano on March 23, 2009 at 8:00 PM

Proud Rino:

Join the Democrat party — you’re only fooling yourself if you think you’re a Republican in any name.

Richard Romano on March 23, 2009 at 8:02 PM

It’s a waste of my time and HotAir’s bandwidth to argue with you Rhino. You read the Jacoby article and picked and parsed what was in it to attack me. IOW you saw what you wanted to see and disregarded the rest of the article. The irony in this exchange is in my original post supported what you said about Frank and the fact he keeps getting re-elected.

The point of Jacoby’s post (the part you obviously missed) was the so-called cradle of Democracy (Mass) is one of the least Democraticaly run States in the Union. You saw what you wanted to see in the article and ran with it.

How he keeps getting re-elected is up to Mass voters and Fwank. We have to deal with Maxine Waters and a shitload of other far-left clowns out here on the left-coast so we have our own crosses to bare. But, in your righteous indignation you pissed all over yourself attacking me when I basically supported what you said. Eat more fish buddy. It may help.

greasywrench on March 23, 2009 at 8:08 PM

Hey Richard Romano, what’s up pal.

greasywrench on March 23, 2009 at 8:09 PM

It’s not a problem that Barney Franks likes to screw men, it’s that Barney Franks is screwing the American people.

afotia on March 23, 2009 at 8:11 PM

Barney Frank is nothing but a heterophobic homo….

RealDemocrat on March 23, 2009 at 8:12 PM

I don’t hate Barney Frank because he’s gay…I hate him because he’s a crooked, lying, condescending, libtard prick.

I’m an asshoLe-O-Phobe!!!

or something….

BigWyo on March 23, 2009 at 8:12 PM

BigWyo on March 23, 2009 at 8:12 PM

I agree 100%.

Proud Rino on March 23, 2009 at 8:16 PM

Barney Frank calls Justice Scalia a homophobe

Is he not allowed to be a homophobe?
So what if he is?
Barney Frank sucks.

roninacreage on March 23, 2009 at 8:22 PM

Is there such thing as “Frank-Phobic”?
What a nutcup.

HornetSting on March 23, 2009 at 8:41 PM

Barney Frank is a heterophobe, a conservophobe and a Republiphobe.

Only fags really like other fags.

Mr Purple on March 23, 2009 at 9:01 PM

When I sent in the Bawney Fwank bigot charge I thought for certain I missed the topic. I guess it pays to read the Fox News ticker which is where I first encountered this.

Yet again we’ve got a democrat getting away with labeling someone without cause. Where is the outrage!!! Just as democrats have used the race baiting card against anyone on the opposite side of the political isle, here we have Fwank using his homophobe [witches] broomstick.

Ed really nails it when he points out that most of Fwank’s Democrat colleagues would oppose any bill forcing homosexual marriage down the throats of Christians. As a Catholic I find the idea to be beyond repulsive, and call on any democrat to show me where in the Bible it states gay marriage is a sacrament. At least the few pro-gay democrats won’t have to worry about me decapitating them as some of the Muslim believers certainly would.

I have seen no evidence to support Fwanks ill advised attempt to paint Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia as a bigot, but the next time I come across any democrat playing the race, gender, or gay card I’ll have just 1 question for them. Will you kiss Bawney Fwank’s bride? After all, he is one of you.

I’ve met a few gay men in my travels, and they all seemed to be decent guys. I liked them all. They sure could give the Bailout Queen a clue.

BTW, would someone please buy Bawney some dentures already! He probably earned the punches in the mouth that knocked out his teeth, but I can barely understand the guy[?] when he speaks.

DannoJyd on March 23, 2009 at 9:04 PM

^^^Apologies for the way long post. ^^^

DannoJyd on March 23, 2009 at 9:08 PM

Only fags really like other fags.

Mr Purple on March 23, 2009 at 9:01 PM

Lovely.

Proud Rino on March 23, 2009 at 9:17 PM

I’m just continually amazed that anyone can understand anything this circus reject says at all. The “guy” practically requires a translator; that or teeth…

Grayson on March 23, 2009 at 9:22 PM

What a bitter fruit. Sour cocktail..A smelly polecat…Sorry, but I just don’t like that pumpous azz.

Itchee Dryback on March 23, 2009 at 6:05 PM

I see what you did there…

fossten on March 23, 2009 at 9:25 PM

Does Barney have any teeth? Every time I see him speak, I’m struck that he seems toothless? Am I missing something, or is he?

TinMan13 on March 23, 2009 at 7:03 PM

I’m thinking that’s a lifestyle based body modification.

Maquis on March 23, 2009 at 9:31 PM

Scalia knows more about the Constitution than Frank knows about boy pick-up locations in Metro Boston.
Scalia is no more “homophobic” than the Founders who wrote the founding documents.

jgapinoy on March 23, 2009 at 9:31 PM

Maquis on March 23, 2009 at 9:31 PM

Gross!

jgapinoy on March 23, 2009 at 9:31 PM

I haven’t read any of the comments on this, just watched the video but I did appreciate Rep. Franks not allowing the “victims” to claim more victimization due to the financial downturn. To suggest that Gays/Lesbians have been negatively impacted in any disproportionate way is ridiculous.

Cindy Munford on March 23, 2009 at 10:20 PM

I don’t care a whim about Barney Frank’s sexual orientation, but I do give a damn about the fact that he is an opportunistic lying little weasel who is one of those responsible for why this country is in the economic mess it is in right now. He has lied far too many times of his part in the Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae mess, and he is now using this Scalia homophobe thing as as smokescreen to cover over his part in screwing up the economy.

His actions are why we seriously need term limitation in Congress.

pilamaye on March 23, 2009 at 10:26 PM

So fecal matter encrusted pedophile pervert Frank is lecturing Justice Scalia on “rights”.

How about the “rights” of US taxpayers, not to have their money stolen by corrupt incompetent politicians, like Barney Frank?

If we had a functioning justice system, Barney Frank would be locked up in Leavenworth and on trial for his miserable life.

NoDonkey on March 23, 2009 at 10:29 PM

Doesn’t it make you proud to hear a US Representative call a US Supreme Court Judge a “homophobe”?

Did the jackass mean to say Scalia is a bigot or does he think Scalia fears homosexuals?

AES on March 23, 2009 at 10:36 PM

I just watched the clip, and I have to say it’s easier to listen to Gibbs mumble, hem haw, and dilly dally than Frank blather uncontrollably.

AES on March 23, 2009 at 10:45 PM

I dream of the day this little pervert is frog march out of his office in handcuffs.Charge with all the crimes that he Sen. Dodd and others like them have done to the American people.

thmcbb on March 23, 2009 at 10:52 PM

I never did understand the term homophobia. It literally means scared of Gays. Who the heck is scared of sissies?

Guardian on March 23, 2009 at 7:14 PM

I totally agree and just really, really hate that term.

I think brussels sprouts are disgusting. I don’t want them on my plate. I won’t eat them. Does that make me “brussels sprouts phobic?” I think not.

I am a Christian. I believe in the Bible. The Bible says homosexuality is an abomination. Furthermore, you atheists out there. it also violates natural law. Evolutionarily speaking, sex is for procreation. Um, last I checked, homosexuality doesn’t lead to reproduction.

Special K on March 23, 2009 at 11:02 PM

Do they really want to call a gay rights bill Enda?

- The Cat

MirCat on March 23, 2009 at 11:08 PM

I haven’t read any of the comments on this, just watched the video but I did appreciate Rep. Franks not allowing the “victims” to claim more victimization due to the financial downturn. To suggest that Gays/Lesbians have been negatively impacted in any disproportionate way is ridiculous.

Cindy Munford on March 23, 2009 at 10:20 PM

Cindy, you make an excellent point. I’m emailing Ed right now demanding that he remove your post. No one should be permitted to say anything sensible.

thuja on March 23, 2009 at 11:16 PM

Only fags really like other fags.

Mr Purple on March 23, 2009 at 9:01 PM

Lovely.

Proud Rino on March 23, 2009 at 9:17 PM

True, though.

Fortunata on March 23, 2009 at 11:32 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOdoabbLBcE

RealDemocrat on March 24, 2009 at 12:04 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SH8pLD0aRBI

RealDemocrat on March 24, 2009 at 12:08 AM

For young people not sure of their sexual orientation, all concerned parents have to do is show them a Barney Frank interview.

Dr. ZhivBlago on March 24, 2009 at 12:23 AM

One of my three wishes would be for the ability to fill out a list of just five living people who would not only cease to exist; they would be erased from the very fabric of history, as if they had never even existed at all. Frank is quickly earning a place on that list.

Blacklake on March 24, 2009 at 12:28 AM

Only if you buy into Frank’s brand of stereotypical Democrat gay-baiting could you possibly make an argument that Scalia is a homophobe. One need only read his opinions to see what kind of reasoning informs them. I don’t even see a hint of his personal convictions in any of his decisions. Unlike people like Frank, who draws every conclusion based on emotion, Scalia — at least in his role as Supreme Court justice — is governed entirely by logic. Which, along with his wry sense of humor, is one of the reasons I admire him so. Definitely Reagan’s best pick for the Court. Love him! Barney Frank can piss off.

NoLeftTurn on March 24, 2009 at 1:41 AM

What a life Barney has . . .Fannie and Freddie
pay him dearly. He swindles like Jessie and Al.

His basement is a fudge packing plant.

How in the world do these thieving creeps keep
getting elected ?

Texyank on March 24, 2009 at 1:49 AM

Frank is one of the people who believes no true Catholic should be a judge. He is a Catholic-phobe or whatever you want to call it.

rockmom on March 24, 2009 at 2:07 AM

Fwank is an a$$hole in more ways than one.

Lummox on March 24, 2009 at 2:30 AM

Does Barney have any teeth? Every time I see him speak, I’m struck that he seems toothless? Am I missing something, or is he?

TinMan13 on March 23, 2009

He has teeth. They are hinged and spring-loaded. They tend to snap back automatically sometimes when he talks and that’s why you mistakenly believe he doesn’t have them.
Otherwise, he’s as normal as Richard Simmons or Liberace or Rock Hudson.

SKYFOX on March 24, 2009 at 5:44 AM

Video: Barney Frank calls Justice Scalia a homophobe

Zip your fly up Barney…Because your smart parts are showing. /Sarcasm

byteshredder on March 24, 2009 at 6:49 AM

Barney Frank needs to,!!!!!! RESIGN!!!!!!!!!!!

canopfor on March 24, 2009 at 7:45 AM

That interview was gay.

You shouldn’t say things like that. It is ‘hate speech’ and offensive to butt-pirates. (To paraphrase Eric Cartman…)

GeneSmith on March 24, 2009 at 8:37 AM

I guess to a militant homosexual Scalia would be considered a homophobe. To the rest of us he would be considered an honest and upstanding American.

I would still like to know why the general public allows these individuals the right to brand those that disagree with them. I mean I myself, though I disagree with their actions and think what they enjoy is unnatural, do not have an irrational fear of sodomites.

SGinNC on March 24, 2009 at 8:43 AM

Barney Frank…..a great example of why we need term limits.

Herb on March 24, 2009 at 10:45 AM

this just in “JUSTICE SCALIA CALLS BARNEY FRANK A HOMO.”

la.rt.wngr on March 24, 2009 at 12:41 PM

The Constitution does not have any language that requires the federal government to recognize gay marriage, or to force states to do the same.

What about the Full Faith and Credit clause?

Mark Jaquith on March 24, 2009 at 11:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2